Mumtaz Ui Hakim S/O Gulam Rasul And ... vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Kamptee ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 11238 Bom

                                               1                                37-wp-664-20j.odt



              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

                  CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 664 OF 2020


  1. Shri Mumtaz Ul Hakim S/o. Gulam Rasul,
     Aged about 30 years, Occ. Service,

  2. Akhtari Begum W/o. Gulam Rasool,
     Aged about 64 years, Occ. Housewife,
     R/o. C/o. Sufi Gulam Moin,
     Dr. Sheikh Bunkar Colony,
     Kalamna Road,
     Tah. Kamptee, Nagpur.
     (Deleted as per order dated 19.06.2021)

  3. Sufi Gulam Moin S/o. Shatir Hakim,
     Aged about 49 years, Occ. Service,

  4. Kaneez Begum W/o. Gulam Moin,
     Aged about 44 years, Occ. Housewife,

       Both are R/o. Near Zam Zam Clinic,
       Dr. Sheikh Bunkar Colony,
       Tah. Kamptee, Nagpur.                                             . . . PETITIONERS

                         ...V E R S U S..

  1. State of Maharashtra through
     Police Inspector, Police Station Kamptee,
     Tah. Kamptee, Dist. Nagpur.

  2. Mallika D/o. Subedar Khan Pathan,
     Aged about 30 years, Occ. Service,
     R/o. Somwari Qtr. No. 147/5,
     Ayodhya Nagar, Nagpur.                                           . . . RESPONDENTS

 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Shri M. A. Qureshi, Advocate for petitioners.
 Shri S. S. Doifode, A.P. P. for respondent no. 1/State.
 Shri Syed Shahid, Advocate for respondent no. 2.
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



::: Uploaded on - 23/08/2021                                 ::: Downloaded on - 07/10/2021 23:48:05 :::
                                           2                           37-wp-664-20j.odt



                               CORAM :- V. M. DESHPANDE AND
                                        AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

DATED :- 18.08.2021

JUDGMENT (PER : AMIT B. BORKAR, J.) :-

1. Heard.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent of the parties.

3. By this petition under Article 226 and 227 of the

Constitution of India and under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, the petitioners are challenging registration of the First

Information Report (FIR) No. 187, dated 26.05.2017 and charge-sheet

under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The FIR came to be registered against the petitioners with

the accusations that on 09.12.2012, the respondent no. 2 married with

the petitioner no. 1 and they are having one daughter. It is alleged

that after 2-3 months of marriage, the petitioners started mentally and

physically harassing the respondent no. 2 on the ground of non-

payment of dowry. It is also alleged that the petitioners beat the

respondent no. 2 and driven her out of house inspite of she being

pregnant. The Investigating Officer completed the investigation by

3 37-wp-664-20j.odt

recording statement of the witnesses and filed charge-sheet against the

petitioners. The petitioners have therefore challenged the FIR and

filing of the charge-sheet by way of the present petition.

5. During the pendency of proceedings, the petitioners and the

respondent no. 2 have mutually resolved their dispute and have

amicably settlement. The petitioners have placed on record

"MUBARA'AT" (mutual divorce as per Mohammedan law), which is at

Annexure-"E" executed on 11.02.2020 thereby dissolving marriage

between the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no. 2.

6. Today, the respondent no. 2 and the petitioner no. 1 are

personally present in the Court. The respondent no. 2 stated before

the Court that they have resolved their dispute and she stated that

marriage between the petitioner no. 1 and the respondent no. 2 has

been dissolved by "MUBARA'AT" and she does not want to continue

the prosecution against the petitioners. She stated that she is

withdrawing the prosecution voluntarily and as per her free will.

7. We have carefully considered the allegations in the FIR and

material produced on record in the form of charge-sheet. On

consideration of the material in the form of charge-sheet, we are of the

4 37-wp-664-20j.odt

opinion that offence alleged against the petitioners are personal in

nature.

8. We have carefully considered the allegations in the FIR and

we are satisfied that offence alleged against the petitioners are

personal in nature. The Apex Court in the case of Madan Mohan

Abbot Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582 has taken a

view that it is advisable that in disputes where the question involved is

of a purely personal nature, the Court should ordinarily accept the

terms of compromise even in criminal proceeding as keeping the

matter alive with no possibility of conviction in favour of the

prosecution is a luxury which Courts, grossly over-burdened, as they

are, cannot afford and that time so saved can be utilized in deciding

more effective and meaningful litigation.

9. In view of the case of Madan Mohan Abbot (supra) and the

amicable settlement of dispute between the petitioners and respondent

no. 2, we pass the following order:-

First Information Report No. 187/2017, dated 26.05.2017

registered with respondent no. 1-Police Station against the petitioners

and consequent charge-sheet bearing R.C.C. No 319/2018 pending on

5 37-wp-664-20j.odt

the file of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamptee are quashed and set

aside.

Rule is made absolute in the above terms.

                             JUDGE                                          JUDGE




RR Jaiswal